Is this normal?



flapsupcleanup

New Member
Aug 14, 2004
151
0
0
I just got to thinking about this graph in CP. Does most everyone have lots more L6 than L5 time or am I just wrong? Although this is for the last 28 days, the breakdown is the same for the last 8 months. A lot of my riding is with groups or riding buddies who all push me quite hard. Does this suggest that I should do something different on my solo days? More L4-L5 and less L6?
 
Well, here's mine.... draw your own conclusions. The real question is whether or not you are fast, eh?
 
The problem with drawing too many conclusions from the graph you posted is that it is raw time by level. If you recalculated by effective training time by level (taking into account intensity and duration), the chart would probably look quite different. IOW, were all the minutes bucketed in L6 actually part of continuous intervals that meet the intensity/duration criteria of L6 intervals? Probably not. Some of them would be reallocated to L1-L5 based on the totality of the ride. Group rides in particular produce a lot of very short blips at L6 or higher, but they would not qualify as L6 intervals. Your next question is going to be, "Why doesn't CP do it that way?" Answer: the rules are non-trivial.
 
RapDaddyo said:
The problem with drawing too many conclusions from the graph you posted is that it is raw time by level. If you recalculated by effective training time by level (taking into account intensity and duration), the chart would probably look quite different. IOW, were all the minutes bucketed in L6 actually part of continuous intervals that meet the intensity/duration criteria of L6 intervals? Probably not. Some of them would be reallocated to L1-L5 based on the totality of the ride. Group rides in particular produce a lot of very short blips at L6 or higher, but they would not qualify as L6 intervals. Your next question is going to be, "Why doesn't CP do it that way?" Answer: the rules are non-trivial.

Good points. A 10-20 second effort at L6 matters if there are lots of them, but a few per hour every day of the week adds up to a total that's not very important.

Wouldn't it be useful to have the software let you decide how long an effort at each of several intensities would have to be before it would be included in such a graph? Like 4+ continuous minutes for tempo, 3+ minutes for threshold, 2+ for VO2max, etc.?

You could do this on a spreadsheet after importing the data.
 
I see your point, RD. Well, sorta. Certainly racking up L6 time a few seconds at a time is not the same as doing it a few minutes at a time. Are you saying that for instance, L6 time is not particularly helpful unless it is of a certain minimum duration?

Actually, I'm not drawing any conclusions at all from that info, I was hoping you or someone else could :). Or I was just wondering if most ppl's breakdowns were similar.

And, no I'm not particularly fast. But I'm getting better!
 
WarrenG said:
Wouldn't it be useful to have the software let you decide how long an effort at each of several intensities would have to be before it would be included in such a graph? Like 4+ continuous minutes for tempo, 3+ minutes for threshold, 2+ for VO2max, etc.?
This problem looks simple on the surface, but quickly becomes complex when one starts looking at the data. The problem is that power is highly stochastic, even when one is trying to ride at a constant power. So, the concept of "continuous" really doesn't apply. If, for example, you were to look for L4 efforts that were continuously within the L4 power level (91-105%FT) for 10+ minutes, my guess is that you would get zero. I worked on an app for match analysis and once you get into the innards of the power variable with 1.26s observation frequency you begin to realize the need for a rules engine.
 
flapsupcleanup said:
I see your point, RD. Well, sorta. Certainly racking up L6 time a few seconds at a time is not the same as doing it a few minutes at a time. Are you saying that for instance, L6 time is not particularly helpful unless it is of a certain minimum duration?
Yes. If you are targeting a certain physiological adaptation, it requires an effort at or above a certain intensity of effort and for a minimum duration. For example, one of the workouts that Andy Coggan discusses is one where he rides for an hour with short repeats, say, FT+100W for 15s then FT-100W for 15s. If you were to download one of these rides in CP and bucket the time by training level, it would put 30m in L6 and 30m in L2. Neither of these is an accurate reflection of the ride from the perspective of physiological adaptation. The entire ride should be bucketed in L4.
 
RapDaddyo said:
Yes. If you are targeting a certain physiological adaptation, it requires an effort at or above a certain intensity of effort and for a minimum duration. For example, one of the workouts that Andy Coggan discusses is one where he rides for an hour with short repeats, say, FT+100W for 15s then FT-100W for 15s. If you were to download one of these rides in CP and bucket the time by training level, it would put 30m in L6 and 30m in L2. Neither of these is an accurate reflection of the ride from the perspective of physiological adaptation. The entire ride should be bucketed in L4.
Thanks, actually I've done those type workouts and it "feels" (I know, there's that word) like a different adaptation than the same duration at L4. Is that perception wrong?

A L6 effort by definition gives a certain intensity (yes?) so the question then comes to duration. For me, looking at my max power curve it appears that I am capable of the bottom end of L6 for around 6 minutes. So to target that area, what duration for me would be useful? Obviously 6 minutes would be great, but what about repeats of 3 or 4 mins?
 
flapsupcleanup said:
Thanks, actually I've done those type workouts and it "feels" (I know, there's that word) like a different adaptation than the same duration at L4. Is that perception wrong?
Yes, the perception is wrong. The reason is that there is a half-life for the physiological response and the 15s durations are short enough that the response never happens. I had to do some of these to prove it to myself, but I really can do these for the same total duration as if I rode at a constant power.

flapsupcleanup said:
A L6 effort by definition gives a certain intensity (yes?) so the question then comes to duration. For me, looking at my max power curve it appears that I am capable of the bottom end of L6 for around 6 minutes. So to target that area, what duration for me would be useful? Obviously 6 minutes would be great, but what about repeats of 3 or 4 mins?
That's more of a question of making efficient use of training time. Longer durations are generally more efficient use of available training time than shorter durations. You could do L4 intervals in durations of 10mins, but why? If we're doing them at the right power level, we can do them for 20 or even 30 minutes. That would be a more efficient use of training time.
 
flapsupcleanup said:
A L6 effort by definition gives a certain intensity (yes?) so the question then comes to duration. For me, looking at my max power curve it appears that I am capable of the bottom end of L6 for around 6 minutes.

From this statement I think it is pretty clear that you've underestimated your functional threshold power...which means that the graph that you've shown is incorrect. (Of course, a graph like that doesn't really say much in the first place, for the reasons rapdaddyo has described.)
 
acoggan said:
From this statement I think it is pretty clear that you've underestimated your functional threshold power...which means that the graph that you've shown is incorrect. (Of course, a graph like that doesn't really say much in the first place, for the reasons rapdaddyo has described.)
Thanks, Andy. Well, the graph didnt look right to me when I first started thinking about it, that's why I asked if it was normal. Dang, if my FT is higher than I thought, that means I have to rethink all my interval levels. And they weren't very much fun before :(

It's true, it never gets easier.
 
flapsupcleanup said:
Or I was just wondering if most ppl's breakdowns were similar.
Mine looks similar now that I've been doing a majority of my rides outside. The terrain around here is very rolling, so it's not unusual to have a "Tempo" ride consist of a fair bit of L6 intensity combined with a lot of coasting or L1 intensity.
 
frenchyge said:
Mine looks similar now that I've been doing a majority of my rides outside. The terrain around here is very rolling, so it's not unusual to have a "Tempo" ride consist of a fair bit of L6 intensity combined with a lot of coasting or L1 intensity.
There ya go....thanks, gf. Thats the thing I was looking for. It's rolling terrain here also, (Tulsa) I guess it just comes with the territory. So to speak.